The Soros-made “New World Order”: The Division of India, Russia, Indonesia, and China into Smaller, Weak Nations  http://www.4thmedia.org/2012/05/30/the-soros-made-new-world-order-the-division-of-india-russia-indonesia-and-china-into-smaller-nations/

Major multinational corporations and the financial and non-governmental organization network of George Soros have taken effective control of a number of United Nations functions within the UN Secretariat and within the organization’s specialized agencies. The goal of this alliance is to re-draw the map of the world for the benefit of the global elites and the “top 1 percent.”

The United Nations, which once prided itself on transparency, has now become a bureaucratic behemoth where decisions are made in closed door meetings attended by diplomats, mostly from English-speaking Western countries; corporate representatives; NGO officials tied to Soros and other entities like the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations; and current and former CIA officers, some of whom act under U.S. State Department cover. It is a fact of life that today a number of UN agencies and elements are funded by private money.

Although South Korean Ban Ki-moon is the Secretary General of the UN, his most important deputies represent the interests of NATO and its allies. The Undersecretary General for Political Affairs is B. Lynn Pascoe, a former U.S. ambassador to Indonesia and Malaysia and is thought by many UN staffers to have links to the CIA. The Undersecretary General for Safety and Security is Gregory Starr, a former Director of the U.S. State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service who is also thought to have close links to the CIA.

The Assistant Secretary-General for Strategic Planning and Policy Coordination is Robert Orr, the former Director of Global and Multilateral Affairs at the U.S. National Security Council on which the CIA is represented. The Executive Director of the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) is Anthony Lake, a former U.S. National Security Adviser.

The Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations is Herve Ladsous of France who has served as French ambassador to Indonesia and China and who is a pro-NATO Atlanticist.

Perhaps no where is the Soros and CIA influence felt more than in the UN Development Program (UNDP), which is headed by Helen Clark, a former Prime Minister of New Zealand. However, Soros’s operatives are heavily present in every UN agency except for Peacekeeping Operations but it, too, is an ultimate target for the multi-billionaire Hungarian Jew who once cooperated with the Nazi occupation forces in wartime Hungary.

Soros is very close to former UN Deputy Secretary General and UNDP administrator Mark Malloch Brown of Great Britain. While UN Deputy Secretary General, Malloch Brown, now Lord Malloch Brown, resided rent-free at Soros’s estate in Westchester County, New York. The UN’s Global Compact is a brainchild former Secretary General Kofi Annan, who is now charged with easing the government of Bashar al Assad from power in Syria.

Pushing the Global Compact, Malloch Brown, while UNDP administrator, invited multinational corporations to “use their purchasing power to help develop small and medium-sized enterprises across the developing world.” The Global Compact essentially gives multinational corporations a say in how projects in developing countries are carried out.

The UN has been holding a number of closed-door meetings and seminars at which the partition of UN member states has been discussed. Most of the meetings have been held under the direction of the UN Interagency Framework for Coordination on Preventive Action (the Framework Team or FT). The FT brings together representatives from a number of alphabet soup UN offices and specialized agencies, including:

DESA – Department of Economic and Social Affairs

DPA – Department of Political Affairs

DPKO – Department of Peacekeeping Operations

DOCO – UN Development Operations Coordination Office

EOSG – Executive Office of the Secretary General

FAO – Food and Agricultural Organization

ILO – International Labor Organization

OCHA – Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

OHCHR – UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

OSAPG – Office of the Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide

PBSO – Peacebuilding Support Office

UNDP – UN Development Program

UNESCO – UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization

UNHABITAT – UN Center for Human Settlements

UNICEF – UN Children’s Fund

UN WOMEN – UN Entity for Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment

UNHCR – UN High Commissioner for Refugees

UNEP – UN Environment Program

UNDEF – UN Democracy Fund

UNFPA – UN Population Fund

WFP – World Food Program

WHO – World Health Organization

World Bank

IMF – International Monetary Fund

DPI – Department of Public Information

OSAA (Office of the Special Advisor on Africa)

DDA – Department for Disarmament Affairs

UNODC- UN office on Drugs and Crime

Much of the work of the FT is carried out under the direction of an American, Gay Rosemblum-Kumar. She heads up the Conflict Management Capacity-Building Project and the Peacebuilding Portal. While the names of these groups appear benign, they are at the center of a global plan by Soros, his NGOs, the CIA, and the global bankers to redraw the map of the world to suit the needs of multinational corporations and the United States and NATO.

Many FT meetings include speeches by Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust survivor who has encouraged international R2P (responsibility to protect) intervention in Libya, Sudan, Syria, and other countries. The FT also relies on a professional trainer in “Conversation” and “Non-violent Communications” (NVC). He has overseen “outsourcing transition,” i.e., informing employees of their lay-offs and “benefits” packages at Merrill Lynch, Charles Schwab, and Bank of New York Mellon. From advising companies on how to inform employees that their jobs are finished, the individual in question now advises the UN on how to tell entire countries that they are “finished.”

The FT also advances the work of President Obama’s “information czar” Cass Sunstein; his wife Samantha Power of the U.S. National Security Council; and Gene Sharp, the Albert Einstein Institution’s developer of the “themed revolution” concept.

The FT has also trained certain activists around the world, particularly in developing and other countries with pro-western governments, to use “the system” to effect change and has advised them “not to protest against their government.” The entire FT operation at the UN is bankrolled with Soros money.

Perhaps the most alarming aspect of the FT’s work is aimed at dividing existing nation-states into smaller entities. At a recent FT meeting titled “Nepal in Transition,” it was clear what strategy is being employed to carry out such divisions. The division of Nepal, with the ultimate goal being the marginalization of the powerful Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), foresees “identity federalism,” the first step before actual secession of federal components.

A number of Nepalese political parties and movements recently signed an agreement that would create an “identity-based” federal republic in Nepal.

The UN’s chief promoter of the strategy is Ian Martin, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General who has headed UN missions in Nepal and, most recently, in Nepal. Under the UN plan, Nepal would be transformed into a polyglot federal republic based on indigenous groups, nationalities, castes such as the Dalit, and Muslims.

Martin has been involved in creating “federal” structures in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Libya. The latter has seen the eastern province of Cyrenaica, with its capital in Benghazi, proclaim its autonomy from Tripoli.

Some UN participants in the talks on Nepal spoke of the need to “eliminate” the Maoists in Nepal. Robert O. Blake, the Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs, and who has been linked to the CIA, participated in the Nepal conference. Blake reportedly helped engineer the February 2012 coup in Maldives that drove President Mohamed Nasheed, ironically a Soros favorite, from power.

The coup, which ushered into power a pro-Islamic government said to be backed by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, could set the stage for a Maldives comprised of autonomous atolls, with the United States able to acquire military bases in certain southern atolls as part of its encirclement of China policy.

Sri Lanka is also a target for the identity federalism engineers. During the 2008 presidential campaign, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama received large campaign donations from front groups for the Tamil Tigers, a guerrilla force that favors an independent Tamil state in Sri Lanka and which is designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department.

As a way of thanking the Tigers for their support, the Obama administration, Soros, and the International Peace Institute of Norway (which has been called a front for NATO, Soros, and the CIA and which supported the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam [LTTE] during their long civil war against the Sri Lankan government) have been pushing for a federal system in Sri Lanka that would create a Sinhalese, Tamil, and Muslim federation, with secession following.

A number of Norwegians are quietly pushing the identity federalism solution, some of whom, particularly Professor Johan Galtung, are Soros favorites..

To augment its identity federalism initiatives, Soros NGOs are also involved in creating a number of “partition studies” programs at major universities with international relations programs.

Myanmar is also a target for the identity federalists and partition specialists. The UN and Soros goal is to split Myanmar into various ethnic-based nations. Some of these nations would then provide the United States with military bases from which it can engage in intelligence, insurgency, and other operations in southern China. The human rights issue in Myanmar and China has been used by Soros as a tool to gain influence in both nations.

The ultimate goal of the EU / US / Japan / Australia / Canada / New Zealand / Soros alliance is the division of India, Russia, Indonesia, and China into smaller nations.

Qatari Opposition: Responsible for Mall Fire, More Operations until Victory http://www.english.moqawama.org/essaydetails.php?eid=20087&cid=274

Local Editor The Qatari opposition declared for the first time its responsibility of actions inside the country. The so-called "al-Haq" (The Right) opposition group announced responsibility for the fire that broke out in one of the major malls in Doha Last Monday. In a statement published by the Qatari Revolution "Face book" page, the spokesman for the leadership of the Supreme Military Council for "al-Haq", Abu Habib Anzi announced Wednesday that "the battalion has carried out a qualitative operation in one of the most important economic facilities in Doha." "We targeted the Villagio Mall that is frequently visited by the Americans, their agents, and servants of al-Kahlifa Bin al-Thani," Anzi said. He added that " the operation came as a response to what he viewed as targeting the Arab people in sake of the US-"Israeli" project aimed at destroying and sabotaging the Arab nation by the thieves of the country: al-Khalifa and their followers." Anzi named the operation as "Thar Allah" (God's Revenge) and noted that "it led to the destruction of the whole mall in the presence of members of the ruling family, their bodyguards, and elements of the US occupation." "The fire is not the result of an electricity problem," the man said and challenged the Qatari authorities to broadcast the live images of rescue operations, the collapse of walls, and pictures of the victims. ""Al-Haq" Brigades won't not calm down or rest until victory is achieved," he vowed as he declared responsibility for operations in the Villagio mall, City Center, Aviation College, and Fatima Bint Walid School.

Guardian’s Houla Massacre Propaganda Stunt Uses "Little Kid"

The Guardian in their piece titled, “Houla massacre survivor tells how his family were slaughtered,” admits that the heart-wrenching emotionally manipulative narrative it published comes straight from a nameless boy allegedly produced by “a town elder who is a member of the Syrian Revolutionary Council and is now caring for him.” This fact, however, is buried paragraphs below, hopefully read long after the Guardian’s intended message takes hold in the minds of readers.

The account raises serious suspicion as it contradicts the West’s own original narrative of the Syrian military “shelling” the victims to death in their homes, and instead appears to be a deceitful, quickly prepared response crafted in the wake of verified evidence presented by Russia before the UN Security Council this week.

The Guardian itself previously published an article titled, “Syria shelling ‘kills at least 90′” as well as a statement by UK Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt claiming the deaths were the result of artillery. Upon that narrative falling apart, the West is apparently retrenching itself in the face of Russian skepticism and reports coming from the people in Houla itself claiming militants, not soldiers, stabbed and shot the victims at close range, not shelled them with artillery.

The Guardian proclaims proudly in their newly crafted narrative that “the young survivor’s chilling account emerged as Russia continued to
blame both Syrian troops and opposition militias for the weekend rampage
in the town that left at least 116 people dead and prompted fresh
outrage against the regime’s crackdown.” The Guardian’s revised account specifically claims the nameless boy supplied by the opposition, saw Syrian troops dismount from their tanks, and kill his entire family in front of him. Paradoxically, the Guardian then claims they weren’t troops, but rather “al-Shabiha” irregular forces who dismounted from armored vehicles with “guns and knives.”

Throughout the entire length of the Guardian’s article, not a single shred of verified evidence was presented. Answering a question as to how the “boy” knew the gunmen were pro-regime militia men, he responded, “why are you asking me who they were? I know who they were. We all know
it. They were the regime army and people who fight with them. That is
true.” Hardly conclusive evidence, hardly fit for print by any reputable journalist, but, however, a textbook example of manipulative war propaganda. 

Hopefully the serial lies told by the Guardian, the BBC who recently included pictures of mass graves in Iraq in their Houla, Syria coverage, and Western leaders who have lied their populations into over 10 years of constant warfare, have finally reached a point where they will no longer be able to advance their agenda with even a fig leaf of credibility. Hopefully, if the West intends to carry forth with its wars of global aggression, they will do so as overt war criminals and invite the measures and penalties demanded when dealing with such war criminals

US Brookings Wants to "Bleed" Syria to Death

The Brookings Institution is a Fortune 500-chaired and funded (p. 35 .pdf) US policy think tank and represents policy makers responsible for the vast majority of both America’s domestic and foreign policy. While some may naively believe President Obama or America’s elected representatives sit behind their desks late at night penning America’s future, in reality, they merely use their desks to rubber-stamp what think-tanks like Brookings passes to them.

And certainly, that policy reflects not the interests of the American people, but of the corporations that spend millions a year to keep these think-tanks flush in cash and ideas, as well as providing them the means to sell these ideas to an unwitting public. Those acquainted with these think-tanks are aware years in advance of wars, conflicts, and conspiracies that take the rest of the public by surprise as events seemingly, “spontaneously” unfold “live” on CNN. 

The Brookings Institution in particular had as early as 2009, articulated a full strategy with which the US would use to undermine, divide, and destroy Iran and its sphere of influence throughout the Middle East. The report titled, “Which Path to Persia?” mentions everything from arming US State Department-listed terrorist organizations, to withdrawing troops from Iraq to allow for an Israel airstrike, to intentionally provoking a war Iran neither sought nor desired. Each one of these options are still, as of today, either fully being executed or “on the table.”

Image: Brookings Institution’s Middle East Memo #21 “Assessing Options for Regime Change (.pdf),” makes no secret that the humanitarian “responsibility to protect” is but a pretext for long-planned regime change.

More recently, Brookings has published “Middle East Memo #21: Saving Syria: Assessing Options for Regime Change (.pdf),” which at face value betrays the narrative the West has attempted to maintain – that humanitarian concerns, not regime change, drives Western intervention in Syria. Not only does the Brookings memo admit the US would like to avoid a settlement or ceasefire that leaves Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in power, but continues on by stating the UN mission can be used as cover to establish “safe havens” and “humanitarian corridors” from which further “coercive action” can be dealt:

“An alternative is for diplomatic efforts to focus first on how to end the violence and how to gain humanitarian access, as is being done under Annan’s leadership. This may lead to the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors,
which would have to be backed by limited military power. This would,
of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad
in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts.” -page 4, Assessing Options for Regime Change, Brookings Institution.

On pages 8 and 9, the memo states:

“The United States might still arm the opposition even knowing they will probably never  have  sufficient power, on their own, to dislodge the Asad network. Washington might choose to do so simply in the belief that at least providing an oppressed people with some ability to resist their oppressors is better than doing nothing at all, even if the support provided has little chance of turning defeat into victory. Alternatively, the United States might calculate that it is still worthwhile to pin down the Asad regime and bleed it, keeping a regional adversary weak, while avoiding the costs of direct intervention.”  -pages 8-9, Assessing Options for Regime Change, Brookings Institution.

In other words, the US is seeking to perpetuate endless bloodshed simply to weaken Syria’s geopolitical influence throughout the region – most obviously running contra to any concept of “humanitarianism” or “international law,” and certainly, purposefully causing more death and carnage, not preventing it. Surely this signed confession seems worthy of airing before the UN Security Council, especially in light of recent revelations that the US and Gulf States are already arming Syria’s opposition with this specific perpetuated bloodshed in mind.

The memo continues by articulating various combinations of military intervention and support to be provided to the so-called “Free Syrian Army (FSA)” – this with full knowledge that the FSA has been conducting documented widespread atrocities of their own, having direct ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and conducting a terrorist bombing campaign targeting civilian populations carried out by militants who admit to having fought as Al Qaeda in Iraq against US troops. Again, it appears that Brookings has conspired to violate a myriad of both national and international laws, in particular, USC § 2339B: Providing material support or resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations. 

Image: Some of the corporate sponsors behind the Brookings Institution. America is bled to
death literally and financially to fight wars of profit and conquest for these
corporate-financier oligarchs on Wall Street and in London. (click image to enlarge)

The depths of depravity from which each of Brookings’ “options” are drawn is horrifying on a Hitlerian scale and represents not only a moral crisis amongst American policy, but a Constitutional crisis – as the policy makers crafting and promoting these “options” (many of which have already been demonstratively carried out) are entirely unelected, are subject to no oversight, Congressional or otherwise, and worse yet, remain mostly out of the eye of an unsuspecting public. Furthermore, Brookings’ “Middle East Memo #21″ is a signed confession of a conspiracy against both the people of Syria and world peace – undermining the “moral imperative” and the “responsibility to protect” those behind Brookings’ policy papers seek to justify their pursuit of global corporate-financier and military hegemony.

Rape and Torture: Weapons in the Propaganda War
Eric Draitser, Stop Imperialism, May 29 2012

Rape and torture have become standard issue in the propaganda arsenal of Western media. Reports from organizations such as HRW and the UNHRC that claim to document the systematic use of rape and torture by the “enemies” of the West have become usual fare in the soft war against whomever the imperialists have chosen to attack. We have seen these claims used to legitimize aggression against Libya, Iraq, and now Syria. In an article published in The Telegraph, the author cleverly uses a quote from an HRW Deputy Director making a general statement about the use of rape in detention facilities in order to humiliate, degrade and instill fear. However, he makes no direct reference to Syria, though the article clearly attempts to draw that abstract connection. In fact, as one reads further, the claims of rape and torture at the hands of Syrian security forces come from “activists” (the usual anonymous term applied to any quotable voice parroting the Western talking points regarding Assad and the regime) who have fled Syria. In fact, the so-called activists are, in many cases, wanted terrorists who have fled Syria not in fear of persecution but for fear of being brought to justice for their crimes. It is significant to note that, even with the obvious bias from the “eyewitnesses” and the authors of the article, there is still no mention of actual Syrian forces engaging in these actions. Instead, it is all chalked up to “militias loyal to the Assad regime,” an important distinction which goes conveniently understated. In fact, the only mention of “security forces” involved in this sort of behavior is added in brackets by the authors of the article themselves. This shows how the Western media constantly manipulate quotes and facts in order to shape them to fit the narrative that the Western propagandists want.

In the run-up to the imperialist aggression against Libya last year, the lie that Gaddafi forces were using rape as a weapon was planted in the public mind, so as to legitimize the obvious warmongering of the West, providing NATO the human rights cover they so desperately needed for their “intervention”. Of course, as is so often the case, the fact that these claims were later proven untrue went conveniently missing from the standard narrative. But, by the time the myth was debunked, the PR damage was done: Gaddafi was a monster, the Benghazi “rebels” and NTC were heroic freedom fighters, and Libya was in dire need of the benevolent bombs of NATO. Almost as important as the content of the claims, was the nature of who made them. The UNHRC, HRW, AI and countless other organizations which are dependent on funding from the US and its allies lent credence to such charges, providing an air of legitimacy to claims which, otherwise, would have been dismissed as little more than NATO propaganda. In this way, these organizations are complicit in the instigation of war and the devastation wrought on Libya. The charges of rape and the systematic distribution of Viagra to Gaddafi forces served another crucial function: they framed the conflict in the public mind to be one between good and evil, rather than between government and rebel terrorists. This is a very significant manipulation because, in order to shape public opinion in favor of war, the forces of Western imperialism needed more than simply a justification, they required an emotional appeal: one that relied not on violence and warfare aimed at fighters, but one that was aimed at the most defenseless, women and children.

Libya was not the first example of this sort of manipulation for the purposes of legitimizing US aggression. One of the most well-documented instances of this blatantly false propaganda was the lead-up to the first and second Iraq Wars. Bush 41 utilized the completely fictional story of Iraqi soldiers barbarically killing Kuwaiti babies in incubators in order to justify the US aggression against Saddam Hussein in 1991. This claim, now totally debunked, painted Saddam as a vicious barbarian who craved death and torture for their own sake. This dehumanization of the enemy and the subsequent emotional and visceral response from the public, allowed Bush to launch his aggressive war. Moreover, this episode illustrated plainlythe complicity of AI and similar “watchdogs” in selling war. Like his father before him, Bush 43 employed the very same tactics to unleash the death and destruction of the second Iraq War. His administration claimed that Saddam ran a series of torture prisons, a fact that, though possibly true, was simply used to justify the aggression against Iraq for the sake of corporate profits and asserting US hegemony in the Middle East. The hypocrisy of these claims should not be lost on any political observer. Within a short time of deposing Saddam Hussein, the US had established its own series of “black site” torture prisons, of which Abu Ghraib was only the tip of the iceberg. Reports of US military, CIA, and Blackwater using torture on Iraqis began becoming more and more common until it had become quite clear that the US was systematically torturing prisoners, precisely the claim that was leveled against the “barbaric” Saddam.

The use of rape and torture lies for propaganda purposes serve a very specific function: they create a climate conducive to war-making when a government has successfully resisted all other attempts at subversion and destabilization. Like the Gaddafi government last year, Assad’s government has managed to stay in power in the face of a multi-faceted, international war being waged against it from all sides. Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, and the rest of the Washington imperialist warmongers are incensed that Assad has not yet fallen and that their terrorist proxies have been unequivocal failures. So they turn to their most effective weapon: lies. As we’ve seen in recent days with the Houla massacre, the Western media, as a mouthpiece for US-NATO propaganda, has launched an all-out media campaign of lies to convince the public that Assad is a heartless, inhuman butcher. The claims that Syrian military forces were responsible for the horrendous massacre have been refuted and debunked countless times, so much so that even the Western media has had to recast the narrative, constantly changing it in the face of evidence to the contrary. Whatever claims of rape and torture that might be true are likely being committed at the hands of the armed terrorist “opposition” in Syria. If we are to believe that there actually are eyewitnesses to these acts, as claimed in the above mentioned London Telegraph article, then it is clear these acts are being carried out by these militias who have no connection to the Syrian government or to the Syrian people and are part of the international subversion campaign. These death squads, like their antecedents in Central America and Iraq, are trained by the West and its proxies in the Middle East because the imperialists know that they cannot otherwise execute their agenda. It is necessary and, in fact, essential for the US and its allies to wage this propaganda war. Without it, rationality and sound political thinking might sway public opinion away from war and back to the idea that Syria belongs to Syrians. This basic conception completely derails the entire drive for war, preventing Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, and the US from imposing their will on the people of Syria and continuing their imperialist domination of the region.

Israel über alles

When we look at all the things that the Israel Lobby has been up to, we sometimes lose sight of the big picture. There has been a virtual flood of action by Congress to help Israel, much of it moving very much under the radar with no real debate and suspensions of rules to expedite the voting. Look at what has happened in the past month: HR 4133 passes through Congress on a 411 to 2 vote giving Israel a virtual blank check on the US Treasury and requiring the White House to prepare an annual report demonstrating how the Administration has guaranteed the Israeli military’s “qualitative edge” over its neighbors. It also provided military equipment — refueling tankers and bunker buster bombs — that can only be used for an attack on Iran. Only Ron Paul spoke out against the bill and even Justin Amash, a Palestinian American and Ron Paul supporter, voted yes, explaining “Our national defense benefits from Israel’s ability to defend itself and to serve as a check against neighboring authoritarian regimes and extremists.” According to Amash, it is constitutional to pay for Israel’s defense because of “Congress’s power to raise and support armies.” The Founders were not thinking of foreign armies to be sure, so Justin had better check on what he has been drinking from the House of Representatives water cooler. A few days later, $1 billion appeared in the 2013 Defense Appropriation Bill to fund Israel’s Iron Dome defense system — something that had been recommended in 4133. No coincidence there.

Read the rest of this entry »